The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty is a non-profit organization based in Washington, D.C. that describes itself as "a non-profit, public interest law firm defending the freedom of religion of people of all faiths." The Becket Fund promotes accommodationism and is active in the judicial system, the media, and in education.[2]

In 2011 Hasson stepped down as President of the Becket Fund, making way for William P. Mumma who has since served as the President and Chairman of the Board. Kristina Arriaga, who was the Executive Director of the Becket Fund starting in 2010 and a member of the firm since 1995,[5] is now a "Senior Advisor to the Board."[6] Montse Alvarado, who started with Becket in 2009, replaced Arriaga as Executive Director in 2017.[7][8]

As of 2014, the Fund had eleven litigating attorneys, and an estimated budget of five million dollars. The firm operates as a non-profit.[9]

The Fund's stated mission is to "protect the free expression of all religious traditions." Clients have included Buddhists, Christians, Hindus, Jews, Muslims, Sikhs, and Zoroastrians. The organization maintains that "freedom of religion is a basic human right that no government may lawfully deny; it is not a gift of the state, but instead is rooted in the inherent dignity of the human person. Religious expression (of all traditions) is a natural part of life in a free society, and religious arguments (on all sides of a question) are a normal and healthy element of public debate. Religious people and institutions are entitled to participate in public life on an equal basis with everyone else, and should not be excluded for professing their faith."[10]

The Becket Fund has served as counsel at the Supreme Court for three religious freedom cases since 2012 starting with Hosanna-Tabor v. EEOC (2012). As a result of the case, the United States Supreme Court unanimously ruled (9-0) in favor of the ministerial exception doctrine for the first time, which exempts religious institutions from anti-discrimination laws in hiring employees.[11]

They also served as counsel to the plaintiffs in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores Inc.(2014)[12] in their fight to exempt themselves from having to pay for four different drugs and devices they deemed as abortifacients.[13] The court ruled 5-4 in favor of Hobby Lobby asserting that family owned businesses have a right to operate in accordance with their conscience.[14][15]

The most recent case the Becket Fund has litigated at the Supreme Court was Holt v. Hobbs (2015). A Muslim inmate in the Arkansas prison system wanted to grow a beard according to his faith. When he was denied his request he wrote a petition to the Supreme Court asking to hear his case.[16] The Court agreed to take on the case and the Becket Fund represented Mr. Holt, citing that the denial of the plaintiff's right to grow his beard according to his faith is a clear violation of the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA). The Supreme Court would later unanimously rule in support of Mr. Holt.[17]

The Becket Fund has represented groups and persons from many different religious traditions; its founder Kevin Hasson has been quoted as saying that the Becket Fund defends the “religious rights of people from ‘A to Z,’ from Anglicans to Zoroastrians.”[1]

The Becket Fund represented Sacramento-area public school students who sought to continue reciting the current form of the Pledge of Allegiance (including the words "under God") in Newdow v. Carey, the second case brought by Michael Newdow seeking to remove the words "under God" from the Pledge of Allegiance. The Becket Fund also represented intervenors in the challenge to the Pledge of Allegiance in Hanover, New Hampshire public schools.[21] Both cases were resolved in favor of the current Pledge language.

Most recently the Becket Fund helped the Matawan-Aberdeen Regional School District in New Jersey. A group of atheists challenged the words "under God" who considered the phrase a violation of the Establishment Clause. The case was taken to the Superior Court of New Jersey where the phrase "under God" was once again ruled constitutional. The atheist group did not appeal.[citation needed]

Another Becket Fund client is a mosque in Murfreesboro, Tennessee that was denied the right to use its building by a local court after complaints that the mosque was promoting terrorism.[22]

The Becket Fund has also litigated on behalf of prisoners who seek to continue following their beliefs in prison. The Becket Fund has sought to ensure that observant Jewish prisoners are provided with kosher food in every prison in the United States. Currently pending is the case of Moussazadeh v. Texas Department of Criminal Justice, which seeks kosher food for the Becket Fund's client Max Moussazadeh.

The Becket Fund has been a strong opponent of the concept of "defamation of religion" as it has been presented at the United Nations and elsewhere. The Becket Fund has argued that protecting religions against defamation puts governments in the position of deciding which religious concepts are valid and thus worthy of protection, and would lead to the suppression of both religious and non-religious speech.

^Banks, Christopher P.; Blakeman, John C. (13 July 2012). The U.S. Supreme Court and New Federalism: From the Rehnquist to the Roberts Court. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. p. 176. ISBN9781442218581.